mississippichem

You still haven't proved you are from 2167. We find it awfully funny that you are somehow unable to prove that which is so easily proved. You could've predicted anything, even the winner of the next sporting event or tomorrow's stock prices. By the way. Why are you the first one to be sent back and why did you not bring any future artifacts back with you? Something like a table top fusion reactor or high temperature super-conductor would've been nice.

I work in a lab run by a female boss and I have mostly female coworkers. At my school grad students have the final say (save department chair intervention) on whose lab they work in if there is room for them. I'm sure it's no coincidence that my lab is full of female grad students. Could it be that your professor in question is simply an attractive (in the professional sense) boss to work for from the standpoint of female students? Women seem to value good communication skills more than we men. Maybe this guy is just compatible with female workers in some non-sexual way. I kind of like working for a female boss as it does away with the whole "mine is bigger than yours" machismo territorial pissing that often arises between stern bosses and ambitious students/employees.

Being a "seed of an octave" is not the basis for defining what is and isn't a noble or inert gas. Tell your friends in the future to send someone more knowledgeable next time. You claim to have extensive knowledge of chemistry (your words), but Im just not convinced. Being from so far in the future you should be able to tell us something about chemistry that is revolutionary in our time. By the way, how is it that you know how to operate our feeble ancient technology? You are posting on the internet which doesn't exist in your time.

This thread makes me cry. From both laughing to tears and being sad about how lame the science of the future is evidently.

Spoon feeding never helped anyone. Let someone learn something on their own, with gentle nudges from those more knowledgeable, and you've changed their life for the better as they will remember the concept and will recall where it came from years down the road.

A circle is not a sphere and the earth is not spherical anyway. If God made the Earth then why can't he understand kindergarten level geometry?

We already have over 49 isotopes now. You've exposed yourself.

I assume you guys have solved the nonclassical norbornyl cation problem in your time. Care to explain? This is a sort of fundamental unsolved problem in the physical organic chemistry of our time. The chemistry textbooks in your time would certainly mention the scientist who solved the problem if it has been resolved in your time. Tell me about some of the other future chemistry as well.

That said shortly before he stated ranting about astrology and other nonsense...

I expected better from Purdue chemistry. This is word salad. What made you turn to the dark side friend?

I agree for the most part. However, what I posted was in response to questionposter's assertion that science is religion. I was merely distinguishing between the two. I do believe science has a knowledge monopoly though, simply by holding the bar incredibly high and having remarkable internal consistency. Is it smug of me? Yes. Props on the James Randi reference though

so many things in science can be derived from multiple places. Lagrange mechanics, Newtonian mechanics, and Hamiltonian mechanics all give the same result for a ball being dropped from some height. You can personally derive all this stuff straight from observation and the laws of mathematics. You don't have to take my word for it so there is no belief involved. We KNOW the equations are correct because they predict what we will observe before we observe it! The correctness of a physical model is not assumed. It is proposed, inspected, argued about, argued about some more, then placed in the big picture of stuff we already agree on. We can usually find some condition where the model breaks down, so then a new model is constructed that either generalizes the original or creates a special limiting law for some specified condition. Religion does none of this. I rest my case.

Questionposter: what value for g have all the other religions predicted? Science is not a religion, you do in fact have it bass ackwards. You can go out and measure gravitational acceleration yourself. Believing something that is supported by such a mountain of data, experience, and logic hardly requires faith. Now can you go out and test any claim made by any religion? I think you will see the difference quickly once you try to falsify a true "faith based" claim.

Should I retake the survey given the changes?

Show some of your work. We don't give answers here

Chemical Engineers most definitely get jobs, and well paying ones at that. Whoever told you that didn't know what they were talking about.

Ideally I think the answer would be materials chemistry or materials engineering but I agree with John Cuthber that as of now the answer is creative writing.

Phi: Though there is something fishy about your methods.

My differential scanning calorimeter works just fine on the assumption that weight is not a function of temperature. I'm sure there are DSC machines out there with enough sensitivity to measure the proposed phenomenon if it exists.

The parts power million units are not really that useful in my opinion either. mol/L, "molarity", is used for for the equations anyway to make things balance out with standard units and constants. Maybe ppm is used because it is more comprehensible to the public, most of whom don't know what a mole is.

There are too many other great folks to nominate. I would only nominate myself if there were a cash prize

People who desire to have sex with children shouldn't be allowed to breed. And if you think sex with a child can in any way be consensual, you are either A) a child or B) a pedophile. Banjofrog: Though we Ameticans are not nearly as annoying as pedophiles who compare themselves to homosexuals or racial minorities in order to get sympathy for their truly disgusting habit of diddling kids.

Sand is safer but go ahead and start heating it now if you want to do this reaction anytime soon. It takes much longer to heat up.

Mathematics: Dr. Rocket Physics: Schroedinger's Hat Chemistry: hypervalent iodine Biology: CharonY I'm also going to create two new categories. Politics: JohnB Generally high quality posting: imfataal

Calories. Real men use Joules or electron volts.